The 2016 Architecture Biennale illustrates the schism between necessity and activist led architecture set against the logic of traditional modes of development. The latter we are told lends itself to a type of architecture that has been excluded from the Biennale, yet it represents the vast majority of how buildings are procured. Why is that the case? Because there is calculable reaction against what is perceived to be irresponsible architecture; a reaction borne out of the economic climate of today.
The answer we are told resides in bespoke, regional, community sensitive, labour intensive solutions that that generate new forms of ecological expression. By their very nature, these forms of development are unique and to a large extent un-scalable. Their material expression and aesthetic merit is seen through the eyes of middle-class architects that form part of the ruling elite.
Moreover, solutions that might work in a remote rural location are seldom transferrable. In other words, the wonderful designs we have seen for a rural chicken shed is not something we can directly benefit from and its design probably carries no weight for the chicken farmer who remains oblivious to our aesthetic concerns.
What we need is to utilise all the tools at our disposal, including the big and the bold. With the exponential rise in population, small ideas, however beautiful and carefully constructed, circumvent the necessity for our very big needs.